Roberts

Roberts v. Fitzallen

Good Law
120 Cal. 482·1898 Cal. LEXIS 793·52 P. 818
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 31, 1898L. A. No. 254California889 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

Action to foreclose a mortgage. Defendants demurred to the complaint on the ground that the action was .barred by the statute of limitations. (Code Civ. Proc., secs. 336, *483 339, 343.) The demurrers were overruled, and defendants failing to answer, their default was duly entered and judgment passed for plaintiff, from which defendant Wells appeals on the judgment-roll alone.

It appears from the complaint that defendant Fitzallen executed his note and mortgage to one L. F. Davis, August 23, 1889; the note was made payable three years from date, “together with .a counsel fee of fifty dollars due upon filing complaint on said note”; the note was indorsed by defendant Isham as guarantor. On April 14, 1890, Fitzallen, the mortgag^ sold the mortgaged premises to defendant Wells, who, “as part consideration and as a part of the purchase price of said real estate, assumed and undertook the payment of said mortgage”; that the said assumption was expressed in the body of the deed by said Fitzallen to said Wells in the following words: “The grantee assumes and agrees to pay a mortgage of date August 23, 1889, to one L. F. Davis, ■and recorded,” etc.,' being the mortgage in suit.- As part…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.